Seven Years in Tibet is one of those films that I kind of knew I’d enjoy but just never got around to watching. There are a couple of reasons, chief among them being the running time. Clocking in at two hours 16 minutes, it’s a pretty hefty commitment and there always seemed to be something else to do.

Not anymore, though, eh? Here are a few thoughts on the film.

The film is based on the “true” experiences of Heinrich Harrer (Brad Pitt, above), a self-centered Austrian mountaineer and his adventures through being taken as a Prisoner of War at the beginning of WWII, escape from the POW camp, and eventual relocation to Tibet and kinship with the young Dalai Lama.

There was a lot of set up in Seven Years in Tibet; more than most films. I’m sure that part of the reason for this is the film’s basis on true events, but the first hour or so of the film dragged quite a bit as we got to know Harrer and other characters. After 30 minutes, I couldn’t help but feel like the director went a bit overboard on the backstory. I only need to be shown that Harrer’s a jerk so many times, you know?

Once the film gets going, though, it hits a nice stride. Harrer’s once-uneasy friendship with fellow mountaineer Peter Aufschnaiter (played by David Thewlis, above with costar Lhakpa Tsamchoe) deepens as the two become settled into their lives in Lhasa and Harrer begins to regret decisions that he’s made. The scenes of them vying for the same woman’s attention are quite touching.

At the same time, a Tibetan politician played by B. D. Wong (It took me forever to figure out where I recognized him from. He plays the psychiatrist on Law & Order: SVU.) befriends the two, and the seed for ultimate betrayal is sown. The plot points there are pretty clearly telegraphed, but we all know how it turns out anyway. Besides, that B-story is only background for the real focus of Seven Years in Tibet.

The centerpiece of the film is Harrer’s friendship with the 14-year-old Dalai Lama (played by Jamyang Jamtsho Wangchuk, pictured above with Brad Pitt). It’s a charming story of the young spiritual leader who needs a friend and the outsider who needs to man up. There’s some nice character development for Harrer, and it was nice to see the fragility of the young man while he struggled with his venerated status.

Overall, Seven Years in Tibet is a good, though somewhat flawed film. Nice direction by Jean-Jacques Annaud, but it could have used a good editor to cut another half hour off the top. Brad Pitt turns in a good performance, but I kind of wish they’d left the tag off the end, instead ending with Harrer’s departure from Tibet. And I wish they’d given him a more period-recognizable haircut rather than the floppy ‘do pictured above.

If not that they could at least have kept him from growing that horrible goatee at the end. Blech. Note to Brad: You’re pretty. Very pretty. Don’t mess it up with bad facial hair.

Related posts

Dear Makers of Charmin® toilet tissue,

I would like to begin by thanking you for your continued efforts to improve Charmin® toilet tissue. Having been a long time user of toilet tissue, I can honestly say that no toilet tissue “does the job” like Charmin® toilet tissue.

That said, I must confess confusion with recent marketing literature for “NEW” Charmin® Ultra Strong toilet tissue. (I know that you’ve taken to calling it “bath tissue,” but nobody uses Charmin in the bath. Let’s just be honest about it.) Here’s the outside of the mailer (click for a bigger view):

I’ll get right to the point. What in blue blazes is going on with that bear’s backside?!? Is it fizzing? Has the bear sat down in a patch of dandelions and gotten the seed thingies stuck on its buttocks? There’s a third option that I won’t name and hesitate to even mention, but –wink wink nudge nudge–? Is that it?

I think that the white things are supposed to be clean sparkles, but the wide-spread pattern would indicate that the bear hasn’t realized that it shouldn’t sit down in its own waste, which is a problem in itself. The mere fact that I’ve spent any amount of time contemplating the state of a bear’s rear end is disconcerting to say the least.

Opening up your card, I find that the bear is still admiring its bottom (it does have some nice badonkadonk, now that I notice it), this time from the left. And the white sparkly things are still there, which is still troublesome. But my main cause for concern on this page is the text, which proudly proclaims that this toilet tissue “leaves fewer pieces behind.”

I’ll be frank with you; I’m not even sure what that means. What does it leave behind fewer pieces of? As I see it, there are only two possibilities here: Either you’re saying that this new toilet tissue of yours leaves fewer pieces of fecal matter behind, or you’re saying that it leaves fewer pieces of toilet tissue behind.

Neither option leaves me entirely pleased to have opened my mail today.

And here we come to the final page, the page that wraps it all up with a clear explanation of the new product. And yet I feel just as lost as before. You’re still referring to the “pieces” and being “pieces-free clean,” but you still haven’t told me what the pieces ARE.

I know it has something to do with DiamondWeave™ Texture, which apparently makes this Charmin® stronger than regular Charmin®, but . . .

I give up. I’ve decided that “NEW” Charmin® Ultra Strong toilet tissue just isn’t for me. I haven’t really had that much trouble with either of the conditions that DiamondWeave™ Texture may have been designed to alleviate. To tell you the truth, I’m kind of upset at having been forced to put this much thought into my toilet tissuing decision. Live and learn, I suppose.

Thank you for your time.

Your friend,
Matt

I found Across the Tracks for $3 at a used DVD store. Clearly this couldn’t be a good movie, because it was, you know, on sale for three bucks. But I like Rick Schroder and I like Brad Pitt, and crappy 90s movies are fun to watch sometimes, so I figured I may as well give it a shot.

The movie was an interesting look at Rick Schroder as he broke away from the child actor thing, and at Brad Pitt before he was BRAD PITT! A serviceable job by both, but nothing worth writing home about.

As for the movie, it’s very After School Special. All the standard plot points and the warm fuzzy ending where Everything Works Out™. The biggest trouble was that it didn’t know who it was about. The first half seemed to be Schroder’s, but somewhere in the middle it switched to Pitt. In the end, it was kind of a mess with a couple decent scenes mixed in.

Marketing-wise, I feel kind of bad for Rick Schroder. Here’s a progression of the VHS/DVD covers. Watch as Rick disappears altogether as Brad becomes more popular.

Anyway, was it worth $3? Eh. Sure.

Ringing endorsement, I know.